SAN DIEGO — A new set of proposed routes for the region’s rail realignment project will move forward for further environmental study, following months of feedback and discussion between SANDAG and entities in coastal North County.
On Friday, the SANDAG board of directors directed staff to advance five route options for the project, which seeks to relocate 1.7 miles of the LOSSAN (Los Angeles-San Luis Obispo-San Diego) rail corridor off of the failing Del Mar bluffs and further inland.
These include one route running under Crest Canyon in Del Mar, one under Camino Del Mar, one starting at the San Dieguito Bridge and running east to the Interstate 5, an option to keep the tracks on the bluffs and add double-tracking, and a no-build option.
After a lengthy discussion and public comments from Del Mar residents, the board voted to move forward with all five options for further study. The cities of Coronado, Encinitas and Escondido opposed them, and Del Mar, El Cajon and Poway were absent.
SANDAG staff noted that the project is still in the early stages of a lengthy environmental review process, and that routes could change.
“We’re still at the very beginning. No decisions have been made, and there’s no recommended alignment yet,” Environmental Compliance Manager Keith Greer told the board. “We expect these will morph over time.”
The next step is for SANDAG to issue a new notice of preparation (NOP) for the environmental review process. Before work begins on the draft environmental impact report (EIR), the public and local stakeholders will have a 45-day scoping period to provide feedback on the NOP.
According to SANDAG staff, the final EIR will take around three years to complete.
Board members commended SANDAG staff and CEO Mario Orso for completing extensive analysis and engaging the public through multiple meetings after putting out an initial NOP for the project last summer.
Following strong pushback to the proposed routes in last year’s NOP, SANDAG initiated a value analysis process in the fall with several stakeholders, including the Fairgrounds, Solana Beach, and Del Mar, exploring 16 broader route options. After releasing a value analysis report earlier this month, SANDAG staff refined these concepts to five options.
“I don’t want it to get lost that SANDAG went through a tremendous reset in this conversation,” said San Diego District 1 City Councilmember and SANDAG Vice Chair Joe La Cava. “There was clearly a lot of pushback, an extraordinary amount of response during the public portion of the NOP, and Mario [Orso] and the team pulled it completely back.”
Del Mar Mayor Terry Gaasterland, the city’s representative on the SANDAG board, said she would abstain from the board’s discussion and voting to keep the city’s options open. This statement echoes comments in a letter sent by the Del Mar City Council ahead of the meeting.
The letter stated that the city is a responsible agency for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and that they will need to approve an amendment to their Local Coastal Program for the project to move forward, which will then require California Coastal Commission approval.
“For the city to select or influence any particular route before the draft environmental impact report is released could unduly prejudice our role as a responsible agency. It is the city’s intent to keep all of its options open to preserve any challenges we may later wish to make in protecting the city’s interests,” Gaasterland said.
SANDAG CEO Mario Orso said the subject of responsible agencies will require more discussion, noting that the California Coastal Commission has already approved a public works plan for the North Coast Corridor, including the realignment project.
Routes
The proposed alignments were built upon routes proposed last June in the initial notice of preparation and alignments studied in previous rail projects as far back as 2007. Preliminary cost estimates for the proposed alignments vary between $1.9 billion and $5.1 billion, with no funding yet identified for the project.
Under Crest Canyon (Under Jimmy Durante to I-5 Knoll) proposes placing a north portal under Jimmy Durante Boulevard and running a tunnel east below Crest Canyon before exiting at a knoll along Interstate 5, with a price of $3.7 billion to $5 billion.
Under Camino Del Mar (Under Jimmy Durante to Torrey Pines Road West) would also feature a north portal under Jimmy Durante Boulevard, with a tunnel traveling south following Camino Del Mar before exiting just west of Torrey Pines Road north of Los Peñasquitos Lagoon. Costs for this route range from $3.3 billion to $4.4 billion.
The San Dieguito Bridge alignment would travel east from the San Dieguito bridge along an elevated viaduct to a portal in Crest Canyon near Racetrack View Drive. A tunnel would then head southeast in a bored tunnel along I-5 before exiting at the knoll along the highway.
The cost for this route would be $3.8 billion to $5.1 billion.
The fourth alignment option would maintain the current rail alignment along the bluffs and add double tracking that would continue through Los Peñasquitos Lagoon, with bluff reinforcement and more robust seawalls at the cost of $1.9 billion to $2.5 billion.
Lastly, SANDAG is studying a “no build” option, as required under CEQA, which would not change the current single-track alignment along the bluff. This would require continuation of significant bluff stabilization efforts.
SANDAG officials recognized that many residents want answers about the impact of these routes on noise, traffic, and people’s homes, including the possibility of eminent domain. However, these questions cannot be answered until the process moves forward.
“With the values analysis, one of the mandates was to minimize all of those impacts to peoples’ homes, and to minimize even the subsurface eminent domain, where trains would be going under peoples’ homes. That’s why the staff has come up with these alignments that are, as far as we know right now without going further, minimizing those sorts of impacts,” said SANDAG Chair and Solana Beach Mayor Lesa Heebner.
The North County Transit District, which owns and operates the rail right-of-way, will have to sign off on whatever route is chosen in the coming years. NCTD CEO Shawn Donaghy also said the current tracks along the bluff would have to be maintained as an active line until the Department of Defense decides not to use them anymore.
Del Mar residents speak out
While no city representatives participated in the board discussion, many Del Mar residents shared public comments at the meeting.
Several speakers said running a train via a tunnel under people’s homes is a non-starter and noted that the proposed routes would be a disaster for property and business owners due to noise impacts, potential eminent domain, and the environment, traffic and local roadways.
“Please imagine, if you will, you have worked hard your whole life, you love your city, you love your home and you plan to stay in it. Then, you are informed that your home will be taken from you with eminent domain,” resident Monica Meredith said to the board. “Is that okay with you if it happened to you? If it’s not okay with you, then it’s not okay for anyone.”
Some residents saw hope in the San Dieguito Bridge alignment, also called the “yellow” route due to its color on the map, as it can potentially avoid people’s homes and the sensitive San Dieguito Lagoon.
“The yellow line is the only line which attempts to meet this goal. It still does have some negative economic, environmental and community impacts, but with the right direction and modifications, these deficiencies can be overcome,” said Del Mar resident Mark Rittenbaum.
Other residents supported alignments that would move the alignment further inland. While SANDAG’s value analysis report did explore more drastic realignments that would move a larger portion of the tracks along I-5 or even Interstate 15, these would cost tens of billions of dollars and are unlikely to move forward anytime soon.
The California Coastal Commission opposed the option of double tracking on the bluffs because it would require additional infrastructure to maintain bluff stability.
